Braverman article

[Motorcyclemptiness]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12669741/suella-braverman-says-police-shouldnt-refer-trans-rapists-women.html#socialLinks

I see my point has been well expressed by Adam Ryan. Rape is a male crime, it should be prosecuted effectively and women actually recover and receive some justice for actual physical harm much more than currently.

That doesn't mean I don't care about the idea of a man claiming to be a woman and described as such in a case of rape. That is a lie.

But you still think describing a man as a woman in a case of rape ”is a bit moot” rather than a significant issue that harms women’s ability to fight MVAW by undermining statistics, suggests women are much more likely to be sex offenders than is actually the case, prevents offenders from being identified, and gaslights victims?.

Sure. I'll be very disappointed if they don't manage to reduce VAWG, however Starmer does have a good track record from his time as DPP so I'm pretty hopeful he will get a good strategy created and implemented.

At the moment they are the only party saying anything helpful about how they will practically make life better for women so all good from my perspective.

@SaffronSpice / practically we don't prosecute rape effectively, a crime that can only be committed by men.

That has been a problem far longer than transgender pronouns, a matter that could actually be fixed within hours by amending the Judicial Bench Book, CPS charging guidance.

That action is something that the Government could get on and do NOW, and so I am forced to conclude that it's pretty moot since what they can do easily is not done, but makes a nice headline, whereas the actual crime is not addressed. You will forgive my cynicism but I don't reckon much to politicians who could, if they were so motivated, actually do something. Suella Braverman and Alex Chalk are actually in unique position to do something but they have not. Talk is cheap.

The government being able to do something but failing to do it doesn’t make it a moot point, it makes it a failure.

Can the government change the judicial bench book ‘within hours’ though? Does that not undermine the separation of the state and the judiciary?

Yes well failure seems to persist. I wonder why that is. And to me, it makes it totally moot. There is no will to do anything no matter the number of statements made on rape, adjusting guidance to deal with pronouns, it never happens: it is window dressing.

Within hours? It's a drafting fix like most of this stuff. We just have a bunch of government ministers who talk tough but don't set a policy. They could. It was done with prisons quick enough.

The judicial bench book is not written by judges but by officials employed by the Ministry of Justice. Like all other policy guidance it could be changed, it's just that there is no effective instruction to do so.

This stuff is so invested in by benefiting parties it’s ridiculous

Look at Baroness Kishwer Falkner, Chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the campaign to get rid of someone with pro women gender critical views

Multiply that by every paid up lackey ready to earn and toe the line

ffs it’s going to take everything to rid us of that, if ever

There are so many misogynists ready to prioritise taking or keeping power first

Probably on here, and in the institutions for sure.

They’ll gaslight and do whatever

Its always interesting to see Ministers concentrating on campaigning for the next Tory leadership election rather than running their departments and the country.

TBH this might secure my Tory vote too.
Most of the stuff in any party's manifesto is bullshit anyway.
One will pledge to spend more on education, the other will spend more on the NHS. One will spend more on national defence, the other on the transport infrastructure.

There's only so much money, unless someone has the balls to increase income tax/business tax/VAT or some other tax, but whether "some women have penises" or "rapists cannot be women" are black and white issues and the party that thinks a woman can have a penis will not get my vote.

There has been a silent coup

Yes and in schools too, so really in trouble

We are up against Orwell levels. Not sure how we’ll counter

She is of course correct about this, but it is astonishing that this even needs to be said, or that saying it is considered praiseworthy rather than a statement of the fucking obvious.

Is there any evidence that the Tories pronouncements on the topic under discussion aren't more of

Most of the stuff in any party's manifesto is bullshit anyway.

How have they done on women's rights in their 13 years in government?

They commissioned the Cass report, did not go forward with self-id, closed the Tavistock, seem to have had second thoughts about the conversion therapy thing, put the kibosh on Scottish self-id. They appear to be trying to get a hold on the police, NHS, and schools

If we compare that to what would have happened if Labour had been in when gender ideology hit the pavement, it's a significantly different place.

How on earth do you compare reality with conjecture? Who knows what Labour would or would not have done?

Of all those things mentioned by Rudderneck it seems the key is Scottish self ID and the UK Government saying no. Now there's all the stuff of devolution which applies and I'd expect the UK Government to win.

What I do wonder about is the underlying issue about the Equality Act. The UK Government absolutely would have got a legal opinion on that. They would. To me, this is the key of it all.

And that advice is going to survive whether the next Government is Labour or Conservative. It must be hot stuff indeed.

Based on what they're saying they want to do now, which is basically, more pronouns and even less safeguarding.

Really?

Yes really. Theresa May/David Cameron were both TWAW self ID proponents, as was Corbyn. Sunak isnt, neither os Starmer.
There is no way of knowing what any other party would do if they were in power now, after the debacle in Scotland and the Isla Bryson/Karen White debacle.
It's such an odd argument to make.

https://twitter.com/polcurrency/status/1717626576945181103?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

In what way is Starmer not TWAW/Self ID?

I agree. Has Labour in Wales pulled back from any gender ID stuff?

I recall Drakeford yelling at a female MP for asking a question, using misogynistic insults

At least you can see the turn of a tanker, despite hugely captured institutions

When the political party and the gender captured institutions line up on thinking, we’re stuffed.

A self-identification system to allow transgender people to legally identify as their chosen gender without a medical diagnosis is not the “right way forward”, Sir Keir Starmer has said.

Well your link is broken, but it's clear that Labour, and Starmer, have been unambiguously pro self ID and are only starting to row black slightly now in the wake of the Isla Bryson scandal and their dawning realisation that this "women can have penises" stuff goes down like a cup of cold sick with most of their voter base.

They have only started to very slightly change their tune this year, with an election coming.

I think it's quite obvious what they would have done if they'd been in power for the last decade.

The current shit show has happened on the Tories' watch, and Labour have consistently said that the Tories haven't done enough on trans rights. So it's entirely reasonable to assume that the situation would be worse today if Labour had been in power.